A house as old as this one becomes in time a living thing. It may have timber for bones and windows for eyes, and sitting here all alone, it can go slowly mad. It starts holding onto things, keeping them alive when they shouldn’t be. ~ Sir Thomas Sharpe

This movie is my attempt to harken back to a classic, old-fashioned, grand Hollywood production in the Gothic romance genre. … This is a genre that was important at the end of the 18th century as a romantic reaction to the Age of Reason. It marries things that are seemingly dissimilar: the heightened melodrama layered with a lot of darkness and the Gothic atmosphere of a dark fairy tale that is both creepy and eerie. It combines these elements to produce a unique flavor. The movie tells you the story of who the characters are through their surroundings and the sets, which are also a reflection of their inner psychology.

Today I realized the last two summers I’ve spent most of my time re-watching two TV series I enjoy a lot: Fringe (2008-2013), and Lost (2004-2010). Today I also remembered both of them were created by J. J. Abrams (with Jeffrey Lieber and Damon Lindelof on Lost, and Alex Kurtzman and Roberto Orci on Fringe), known lately for his reboot of the Star Trek franchise. I don’t like what he did to Star Trek. For me, his characters are flat and lacking the freshness and ahead-of-its-time quality of the Star Trek world. Abrams turned the beauty of the themes in Star Trek—acceptance, diversity, respect, and honor—to the action-driven superficiality of Star Wars.

I asked myself why Abrams took that turn, especially after creating all the rich characters and complex situations on Lost and Fringe. That’s a rhetorical question, of course; in most cases they (Hollywood, the film industry, the producers) create what the audience wants. Other than this statement, I don’t have an actual answer to that question. I could think that Abrams wanted to portray the characters according to the personalities shown in the Original series. The problem with that is that Abrams’ reboot was released on 2009, and the Original series on 1966. The period difference is ridiculous, including the social/political/cultural circumstances. In other words, you cannot expect the 60’s Star Trek formula to work seamlessly in the 21st century. It is antiquated.

But I’ll stop now. That’s a topic for another discussion.

Today I want to talk about Lost and Fringe: two TV shows that focus on character developing with a side of science fiction and drama. Continue reading →

Yesterday I rewatched Chan-wook Park’s Vengeance Trilogy—Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance (2002), Oldboy (2003), and Lady Vengeance (2005). I hadn’t watched Mr. Vengeance (2002) so I took the time to watch them all, back to back, as a background exercise for my thesis research. Because of this six hours of audiovisual enthrallment (two hours per film), I decided to make a post about Mr. Park. Even if I didn’t want it to, he has become a big part of my life—personal and academic. Continue reading →

“In a horror film, lighting is 70% of the effectiveness. It’s essential in creation the atmosphere.” ~ Mario Bava

Shame on me. After a BA degree in Audiovisual Communication, and an almost MA degree in (Theory and Research in) Communication, after a long list of courses taken on film production, film theory, and media studies, I finally got to meet the cinema of Mario Bava. I’ve only watched three of his films but I am loving his auteurship.

I remember reading about him in the Rue Morgue Magazine but back then I didn’t have Netflix. I was reminded of him when I was reading this article from Taste of Cinema that mentions one of his films, Black Sunday (1960). And then it clicked: I had that movie in my Netflix queue for a very long time!

Black Sunday (1960)

After searching if any of the other movies mentioned in the article was available on Netflix (I really want to watch Viy [1966]), it was time for Black Sunday (1960). And then I was enthralled. Continue reading →

A few years back I took a film history course that changed my life forever. It required two sessions: one which was two times a week for an hour and a half, and a second one that was a 3-hour session for movie screenings. I remember that we had to write mini reviews about the films we watched on those screenings. I watched so many hard-to-find films, and (cult) classics that all I wanted to do was learn film history. One of the movies that I loved was Bonnie and Clyde (1967). I remember reading about it before but never got to watch it until that glorious Friday screening.

Bonnie and Clyde (1967)

Bonnie and Clyde (1967) expanded my visual knowledge to another level. This romantic movie about a couple of fugitives introduced myself to a whole new array of vintage classics that weren’t monster movies (like the ones I used to watch). And those were crime films with an almost excessive level of violence that (was) seduced (by) censorship. Bonnie and Clyde (1967) was a pioneer in that aspect, and it also lead me to watch more films about delinquent couples, like Natural Born Killers (1994) and Thelma and Louise (1991). Bonnie and Clyde (1968) was also my first ultra-violence experience from the 60’s, which makes it highly relevant to my thesis theme. Continue reading →